Das Zustandspassiv – Pragmatische Beschränkungen und Regelkonflikte

Abstract

In constructions of copula + participle II, often called “Zustandspassiv”, we find many unclear restrictions. Maienborn (2007: 83-115) explains these by pragmatics in the following way: One invariant meaning is opposed to different pragmatic readings that are gaining their existence in the pragmatic level only. We explain these restrictions in semantics itself. Restrictions in forming copula + participle II-constructions are due to conflicts between the construction meaning of copula constructions and the construction meanings of participles II. Pragmatics is mediating between the conflicting construction meanings by means of pragmatic implicatures. Due to these accommodations nearly no copula + participle construction is grammatically wrong in a strict sense, but many constructions remain restricted in their acceptability. The construction meaning of Zustandspassiv is opposed to three meaning variants of participle II. The interplay between the construction meaning of copula constructions and the three meaning variants of participles II results in different accomodations between copula-constructions and participle meanings. In some cases participle meanings adapt to copula construction meanings, in other cases the opposite process is going on. On the one hand the construction meaning of copula construction is the predication of a property to the referent of the subject. On the other hand there are a post state (target state) meaning, a present state meaning and a past time meaning of particples II. The interplay with the construction meaning of the copula construction results in four meaning variants of Zustandspassiv: post state (target state) as a property, present state as a property, past time of an event as a property, and past time meaning only. The meaning ‘past time of an event as a property’ is grammaticalizing to a past

Towards a correlation of form, use and meaning of German <i>ge</i>-prefixed predicative participles

“…In the current section, we show that adjectives and be-prefixed participles that predicate individual properties differ importantly from ge-prefixed participles derived from verbs with respect to the formation of ung-nominalizations and superlatives. Our account thus differs from the extensive literature on German predicative participles - Rapp (1997); Kratzer (2000); Maienborn (2007); Welke (2007); Gehrke (2015), to name just a few prominent works -in that we do not follow the traditional assumption that German be-prefixed participles are derived from verbs. In particular, we claimed that the form, use and meaning of be-participles is not determined by properties of a (possibly) underlying verb.…”

“…Consider (62). The close parallel between predicative participles and perfective aspect has been previously recognized in the literature, see in particular Welke (2007) for an over-view and extensive discussion. Since a detailed discussion of ge-prefixed participles in perfect constructions is beyond the scope of the present paper, we leave a further exploration of our analysis of ge-prefixed participles as a starting point for the possibly uniform semantic analysis of predicative and perfect participle forms to future research.…”

Word Order and Passivization in English and German: A Syntax First Alignment Approach

“…The plank is in two parts sawn 'The plank is cut in two pieces.' (Welke, 2007) 14 Goldberg and Jackendoff (2004) share a similar view concerning English. An AP or a PP can add a resultative character to the predicate.…”

Apie lietuvių kalbos reikiamybės dalyvio vartojimą ir reikšmę gretinant su vokiečių kalba

“…Maienborn 2007, Welke 2007, Helbig 2008. Es geht hierbei um den Ansatz, die Konstruktion sein + zu-Infinitiv zusammen mit den anderen Konstruktionen wie Zustandspassiv, Zustandsreflexiv oder sein + Adjektive auf -bar als Kopula-Konstruktion aufzufassen, denn die genannten Konstruktionen "erfüllen die semantische Bedingung der Kopula-Konstruktion, indem sie geeignete Eigenschaftsausdrücke zur Verfügung stellen" (Welke 2007, 142).…”